Examples of when it is not advantageous to be lightweight

[Michael Hill]

Originally Posted by nathannfm

I think this is always true of subsystems, including the drive, until you start to sacrifice structural integrity, but not true for the robot as a whole. When I say "lighter is better" it is usually because if it's not stressed you get to week 5 with a 150lb robot and a major sub system has to be removed because there is no time to redesign all of them to be lighter. On MOE we always have 120.00lb robots because we usually shoot for maximum functionality (do all the things!) and this usually requires more weight than a robot specialized to do a specific task. We embrace this so much that if we get to week 4 or 5 and realize we have 4lb to spare we try to think of a way to use that 4lb to make our job easier, more reliable, or faster.

Definitely agree with the structural integrity comment. I would much rather use a thinner material before I use lightening holes. Remember the saying "only as strong as the weakest link"? That applies to structures. Your robot is only as strong as the smallest cross-sectional area. When you have lightening holes, especially ones that are close together, you create a distinct point of failure. If you just design it with thinner material from the start, you can likely avoid lightening holes altogether and maintain a larger cross-section than you would have with a lightened structure.